The Moral Foundation for the American Struggle for Independence

Without the revolution that the colonists started, we would not have the United States of America today. Although the colonists had patriotism towards Britain, they also were tired of the mistreatment and the string of events that led up to the breaking point. The colonists were morally justified in declaring independence from Britain. The colonies were almost as their own nation anyway. America had grown immensely apart from Britain culturally and politically. Instead of the colonies becoming an addition of England, it had become a new country in itself. When the Americas was first colonized and settled, America did not have a king, head figure or leader. The goal of the people in America was to create a new form of free government. Among the many complex factors that contributed to activating the American Revolution, two factors stand out most evidently which were, England's imposition of taxation on the colonies and the failure of the British to get approval of those being governed, along with the military measures England took on the colonists. Adding to these factors were the religious and political heritage of the colonies, and the limit of political freedoms by the British. Taxation was one of the greatest factors stimulating the American community to rebel in the years leading up to the American Revolution. One of the most striking examples of this kind of taxation was the Stamp Act of 1765. After many years of fighting, England badly needed revenues from their colonies, and they sought to acquire these revenues from the Americas. The Stamp Act of 1765 stated that people of almost any occupation were forced to buy stamps for their documents. In other words, the act executed a tax on every printed paper in the colonies. For example, a printer had to buy stamps in order to legally be able to distribute his publications. While the act itself was not so harmful to the economy, it was the idea behind the act (an attempt on the part of the British to help itself and raise revenues in the colonies) which drove the cause. The colonists also believed in the idea of natural rights which states every man has the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The British were continuously pushing this idea and taking away these rights. The British were taking away the idea of property, which is the pursuit of happiness in this case. They were taxing and taking away the ability of creating and having money or property in the taxing. The obvious example in this case would be the Mutiny (Quartering) Act of 1765. In this act, the colonists were forced to assist in maintaining and providing quarters for the British Army. The Americans were clear and concise on what they wanted: Whatever the reason or the type of tax it was, it could not exist without the agreement of the colonists who were being taxed. The colonist had no seats in the British parliament and therefore had no say or ability make decisions on their own standards of living. They believed in the right to self-govern. The final straw will come when the British government passed the Tea Act of 1773. The Tea Act lowered the price on this East India tea so much that it was way below tea from other merchants. But the American colonists saw this law as yet another means of "taxation without representation" because it meant that they couldn't buy tea from anyone else. This infuriated the colonial merchants, because a monopoly had taken away their capability to trade in the valuable tea. Not only did the economic results of the Tea Act anger the merchants, but also the idea of taxation without representation once again. The colonists did a complete boycott. The "Boston Tea Party" was in reaction to the anger of this new tax. The British imposed the “Insufferable acts” as a punishment towards the colonies after the revolt. The fact that there was a strong resentment towards the British by the colonists would be an understatement. When they were obliged to live with the people they resented, a spirit of revolution was evoked. There already existed strong feelings of resentment towards England due to the past taxation acts. The colonists were also in a sense, “left out.” They were across the ocean and were no longer an attached part of their home country. They were not involved in any decisions that parliament was making, which was directly affecting the New World. The idea of taking away the natural rights (the rights that we are all born with given to us by our creator, our god) is unjust. Taking away somebody else’s natural rights or limiting them is defined as crime. So the British were using legal crime and therefore justifies the idea of declaring independent from a government that is implementing unfair laws. The purpose of government is to secure and protect inalienable natural rights of the people. For their part, the people must obey the laws of their rulers. So, a sort of agreement exists between the rulers and the ruled. But, if a government persecutes its people with abuses over an extended period, the people have the right to resist that government, modify or abolish it, and create a new political system. This means that the people who are being ruled over have a right to choose how their government functions. If the government tries to do things without the people's consent, then that would be unjust. They were justified in breaking away from this unjust government that was not protecting their God given human rights, but were instead, actively working to destroy the very rights it was supposed to be protecting. Liberty, the idea of freedom and agency is a part of the natural or unalienable rights. With resistance and rebellion through protests, boycotts, and other political movements, independence was slowly becoming in reach. The conflicts between the two sides foreshadowed a war, leading into independence and an American Revolution.